Wednesday, 24 March 2010

The Supreme Court on Wednesday evening delayed the execution in Texas of Henry W. Skinner, at least until the Court acts on his new case seeking to pursue a civil rights claim that he was denied a chance to have DNA evidence tested in an attempt to prove his innocence of a triple murder more than 16 years ago. The Court’s order blocked an execution that had been scheduled for 7 p.m. Washington time. The Court has not yet scheduled its consideration of his pending appeal (Skinner v. Switzer, 09-9000; his stay application was 09A743).

Skinner is seeking to raise an issue that the Justices had agreed to review last Term in District Attorney’s Office v. Osborne (08-6). The Court decided the Osborne case on June 18, but left unresolved that specific issue. The question is whether a state inmate seeking access to and testing of DNA evidence may pursue that claim under civil rights law (Section 1983), rather than in a federal habeas challenge. Skinner’s lawyers contend that he has tried unsuccessfully to use Texas state procedures for DNA testing, so his only remaining chance to get it is through a civil rights claim.

He was convicted in 1995 and sentenced to death for the slaying of his live-in girlfriend and her two mentally retarded, adult sons, in their home in the small town of Pampa, Texas, on New Year’s Eve in 1993. He was in the home during the murder rampage, but has contended repeatedly since then that he was unconscious from using drugs and alcohol earlier in the evening. He also has contended that new evidence, about the physical nature of the killings, indicates that in his condition he had neither the strength nor clarity of mind to commit the crimes.

For ten years, his lawyers have said, he has sought access to DNA evidence that was never tested by prosecutors. He filed his federal civil rights claim only after those efforts had failed, his counsel has said. Although prosecutors arranged for some DNA tests on some of the evidence, and used the results to help convict Skinner, his attorneys contend that prosecutors only sought selective testing of crime scene materials.

In his petition for review, Skinner contended that he has a constitutional interest under state law in seeking to use evidence that would help prove his innocence, but that he has been frustrated in trying to vindicate that interest in state proceedings. In addition, the petition argued that the conflict among lower courts on whether a DNA access claim can be pursued under civil rights law, or only under habeas law, has intensified since the Supreme Court agreed to examine that issue in the Osborne case last Term. Thus, it said, the need for Supreme Court guidance is now “more urgent.”

Lawyers on both sides have completed all of the filings in the case on that issue, so the Court is expected to schedule it for Conference within a matter of weeks. In the meantime, the postponement granted Wednesday will stay in effect until the petition is acted upon and, if granted, until it is decided. If review is denied, the postponement will expire automatically and the state could then schedule execution anew.

For the last month, exoneree Greg Taylor is adjusting to life at home. He's photographed with his daughter.

To see the world through Greg Taylor's eyes, imagine being stuck in a time machine for 16 years and delivered to 2010.

Facebook, flat screens and DVDs are all new to him. Relationships that used to come with natural ease seem awkward.

Since 1993, Taylor, now 47, had been locked away in North Carolina's prison system for the murder of a prostitute. Last month, he was exonerated and freed.

"All that frustration and confusion I had stored up all those years was just let out," Taylor said, recalling the day he was released, February 17. "There was a lot of relief and gratitude. There was a whole lot to get used to."

He agreed to jot down his impressions and share them with CNN.

After a month readjusting to life outside prison, Taylor has concluded that Facebook is "neat but a waste of time." He's in awe that a flat, round disk called a DVD lets him rewind and fast-forward movies by just pushing a button. He finds the automatic soap dispensers in the mall bathrooms startling.

Taylor is the first man to be exonerated by a state innocence commission, which makes his case stand out from those of the more than 500 people across the country who have been exonerated by the work of private attorneys, according to the Life After Exoneration program.

The group that freed Taylor, the North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission, was created in 2006 after a succession of wrongful convictions were revealed. It's a one-of-a-kind program with a state-mandated panel that re-examines questionable cases, including those that don't involve DNA evidence like Taylor's.

Other jurisdictions are following North Carolina's lead, looking at creating government agencies to prevent and reverse wrongful convictions. In New York City, the Manhattan District Attorney's office launched a program this month to proactively flag common errors such as witness misidentification and false confessions before the case go to trial.

A petition filed before the Florida Supreme Court by a group of attorneys asks the state to create an agency based on North Carolina's model that will examine why wrongful convictions occur. Attorneys hope gathering useful data on eyewitness misidentifications and snitch testimony will highlight systemic flaws that need repair.

In Taylor's case, the commission considered new tests that revealed that a stain found in Taylor's truck was not blood, as the prosecutor had argued. The commission also reviewed testimony from the jailhouse informant who implicated Taylor at the trial.

By the time the commission decided to free Taylor on February 17, he had already spent a total of 16 years behind bars.

That day, he stumbled out of the courthouse without shackles for the first time. He grinned when his 26-year-old daughter embraced him tearfully. No longer a 9-year-old, Kristen Puryear had a child herself, making Taylor a grandfather.

She drove while her father sat in the passenger seat.

The post-exoneration journey is daunting for many former inmates, most of whom have spent a large portion of their adult lives in institutional settings.

The Life After Exoneration Program found one out of three inmates has lost custody of children. About 25 percent develop post traumatic stress disorder, but access to counseling and medical care is limited without employment.

Unlike parolees, who are convicted of crimes, those exonerated don't have access to corrections services.

When Taylor left prison, the state of North Carolina gave him a $45 check. It was intended to get him a hotel room and back on his feet. The amount makes him laugh.

Taylor spent his first day after his release at the mall, eager to trade his scratched plastic prison glasses for new ones. He passed a bakery where the aroma captivated him. In prison, sights and smells are muted, he explained. Inmates wear identical uniforms and eat the same tasteless cafeteria food.

"I could have stood there all day," he said.

Incarceration can also place strains on relationships with loved ones. For Taylor, it separated him from his wife and some of his closest friends.

Three days after his release, Taylor received a phone call from his childhood friend, Kenny, who had sent Taylor letters and magazines in prison but never visited.

"There was a lot of people that could not stand to see me in prison," Taylor explained.

The two friends grew up as University of North Carolina basketball fans. This spring, they reunited in front of the television to cheer their favorite team on.

Taylor's marriage was another relationship that suffered when he was in prison. His wife of 10 years, Becky Taylor, supported him throughout the trial. But several months after he entered prison, they divorced.

For their first face-to-face meeting in 16 years, Taylor's ex-wife came for dinner at their daughter's house. The conversation was cordial. She had moved to another suburb and remarried. But the comfortable ease he once felt around her had faded.

"It was the loss that hit me," Taylor said. "I just don't know her that well anymore."

But some things are just like he remembered. Taylor spent last weekend at Lake Jordan State Park, one of his favorite retreats. Before prison, he used to go boating and water ski in the summer with his daughter. This time, they sat on the lake front watching the dark, still water and inhaling the crisp air.

"It was the largest body of water I had seen in a long time," Taylor said.

After three weeks of living with his daughter, Taylor knew he needed to pull his life together. He knew he couldn't stay in his grandson's room forever.

He's looking for a car. He's gone online to build a model of the Honda Accord he wanted using the slim laptop his family bought for him. They didn't have computers that skinny in 1993, he pointed out.

He went to the barbershop for a haircut to prepare for job interviews. There, a woman cut his hair with scissors. In prison, he said, other inmates used toenail clippers to trim his hair.

Taylor says he sometimes feels overwhelmed by the daunting tasks ahead -- getting a job with medical benefits and finding a place to live. Two-thirds of those exonerated will not become financially independent, according to the Life After Exoneration Program.

Sometimes, he said, it feels as if his body is being yanked in too many different directions. His father has helped him pursue some job leads. So far, he's had no luck.

"I can't live in my grandson's room forever," he said. "When I have a routine, that's where the happiness is going to be."

But he's in no rush. He's got a daughter and grandson to get to know -- and plenty of people to catch up with.

Saturday, 20 March 2010

Isn't a man's life worth an extra 30 days?

Henry W. "Hank" Skinner, convicted of murder in 1994, may be guilty as sin.

Then again, he may be innocent.

But so what?

This is Texas, and Skinner is scheduled to be executed Wednesday evening even though simple testing might prove conclusively that he was not the killer of his live-in girlfriend and her two adult sons 16 years ago in the Panhandle town of Pampa.

Of course, the DNA testing could confirm his guilt, or perhaps be deemed inconclusive.

Either way, would it not make sense to do the testing if it helped us to be sure one way or the other? Why is the state so adamant about not doing it?

Do we permit Texas to make a possible deadly mistake without even trying to learn the whole truth?

It seems almost ironic that Gov. Rick Perry came to Fort Worth on Friday with a freshly issued pardon for a man who was wrongly convicted of raping a Texas Tech student in 1985.

Tim Cole, who was exonerated by DNA testing last year, was not there to receive his pardon -- his mother accepted for him. The test that proved his innocence came too late for Cole. He died in prison while serving a 25-year sentence for that wrongful conviction.

Cole's family fought hard and long to clear his name and has worked tirelessly for legislation that would help keep such miscarriages of justice from happening. A state advisory panel on wrongful convictions was named in his honor.

I was with Cole's family Friday afternoon as his mother, Ruby Session, along with Cole's sister and five brothers accepted the pardon.

After Perry's visit, Session took the governor's pardon to her son Tim -- at his grave.

Session has said no other family should have to go through such an ordeal, especially when DNA testing could have proved a defendant's innocence.

That brings us back to Skinner's case.

He maintains his innocence, but none of us knows for sure whether he bludgeoned Twila Busby to death and fatally stabbed her two sons on New Year's Eve, 1993. Skinner's attorneys argue he was convicted on "entirely circumstantial" evidence even while untested evidence remains sealed. Prosecutors and the courts have refused to permit a forensic examination for DNA as Skinner's execution date draws near.

Lawyers for Skinner officially asked the governor this month to grant a 30-day reprieve and order DNA testing on evidence that prosecutors say still exists.

In addition to the problematic trial evidence, the attorneys offer evidence to prove that Skinner was too incapacitated by alcohol and drugs to have committed the crimes even though he was in the house when they occurred.

Students of Northwestern University's Medill School of Journalism, who investigated the case in 1999 and 2000, helped uncover some of the disturbing revelations in the case.

The state's star witness, a woman whose home Skinner went to after he left the crime scene, recanted her testimony on tape. She has repeated, under oath, that she lied after authorities intimidated her.

Several witnesses believe, as was suggested during the trial, that the dead woman's uncle was the killer, and it has been suggested that a windbreaker found next to Busby's body belonged to him. Again, prosecutors never followed up on those allegations, attorneys say.

But the most crucial evidence -- seven items, in fact -- could be the most revealing if only tested for DNA: 1) vaginal swabs taken from Busby; 2) Busby's fingernail clippings; 3) a knife found on the front porch of Busby's home; 4) a knife found in a plastic bag in the living room; 5) a dishtowel also found in the bag; 6) the windbreaker; and 7) hairs found in Busby's hands.

Hair that was introduced at trial, by the way, was not Skinner's.

This overwhelming information could give new insight into the case, not to mention other things in the lawyers' petition to the governor.

Texas has waited this long; what's wrong with taking an extra 30 days if it could get to the truth?

"I'm not an advocate of Hank Skinner," law professor Robert C. Owen wrote in the appeal to the governor. "If DNA tests could remove the uncertainty about Skinner's guilt -- one way or the other -- there's not a good reason in the world not to do it."

I totally agree.

As a resident of this state, and with Tim Cole constantly on my mind, I don't want the death of another innocent man on my hands -- or my conscience.

Thursday, 18 March 2010

WATERTOWN, MA (March 17, 2010) - On March 26, the Dead Man Walking School Theatre Project (DMWST project) will be discussed on the CatholicTV talk show “This is the Day”. The DMWST Project works with high schools and colleges to produce the play “Dead Man Walking” which was written by actor Tim Robbins and is based on the book by Sister Helen Prejean which was also made into a film starring Sean Penn and Susan Sarandon. This is the 6th season that the play has been presented as part of academic and theater curriculums in schools.

Sister Helen’s books are accounts of her friendship with 2 death-row inmates and her call to end capital punishment. Sister Helen commits herself to the protection of life, both innocent and guilty.

This is the Day airs at 10:30AM ET at CatholicTV.com and on CatholicTV. This is the Day is hosted by the Director of the CatholicTV Network, Father Robert Reed, and General Manager, Jay Fadden.

Steven Crimaldi will be interviewed on This is the Day. Steven is National Coordinator of The Dead Man Walking School Theatre Project. Steve is currently working on the award-winning Anti-Death Penalty Alternative Spring Break. The specific purpose of the Death Penalty Alternative Spring Break is to bring students together for five days of anti-death penalty activism, education and fun. This is the place to be if you want to become a part of the next generation of human rights leaders. The 2010 event features six innocent death row exonerees: Shujaa Graham, Curtis McCarty, Ron Keine, Derrick Jamison, Perry Cobb and Juan Melendez. They are attending alternative spring break to speak with participants about how innocent people can end up on death row. Altogether, the six exonerees attending the alternative spring break spent a total of about 65 years on death row for crimes they did not commit.More information on the Dead Man Walking School Theater Project and the Death Penalty Alternative Spring Break may be found at http://dmwplay.org/ and http://www.springbreakalternative.org/deathpenalty/

CatholicTV broadcasts across the US on Sky Angel channel 142, and selected cable outlets in New England and in Chattanooga (TN) where CatholicTV is available on FiTV channel 153. To find out where to watch CatholicTV visit: http://www.CatholicTV.com/schedule/where-to-watch.aspx

CatholicTV is a nationally-broadcasted television network streaming a live feed 24 hours a day at CatholicTV.com. Heeding Pope Benedict XVI's call to greater utilize the power of television and new media, the CatholicTV Network features its cable TV station, Catholic web site, mobile apps and widget. Celebrate Mass online; pray The Rosary; enjoy programs on prayer, the saints, the Scriptures and the Catholic Church on America's Catholic Television Network.

“This is the Day” can also be seen on demand at www.CatholicTV.com or downloaded via iTunes.com.and SQPN.com The hosts, Father Robert Reed, and Jay Fadden discuss various topics of the week and respond to viewer mail (you may email the show at thisistheday@CatholicTV.com)

WATERTOWN, MA (March 17, 2010) - On March 26, the Dead Man Walking School Theatre Project (DMWST project) will be discussed on the CatholicTV talk show “This is the Day”. The DMWST Project works with high schools and colleges to produce the play “Dead Man Walking” which was written by actor Tim Robbins and is based on the book by Sister Helen Prejean which was also made into a film starring Sean Penn and Susan Sarandon. This is the 6th season that the play has been presented as part of academic and theater curriculums in schools.

Sister Helen’s books are accounts of her friendship with 2 death-row inmates and her call to end capital punishment. Sister Helen commits herself to the protection of life, both innocent and guilty.

This is the Day airs at 10:30AM ET at CatholicTV.com and on CatholicTV. This is the Day is hosted by the Director of the CatholicTV Network, Father Robert Reed, and General Manager, Jay Fadden.

Steven Crimaldi will be interviewed on This is the Day. Steven is National Coordinator of The Dead Man Walking School Theatre Project. Steve is currently working on the award-winning Anti-Death Penalty Alternative Spring Break. The specific purpose of the Death Penalty Alternative Spring Break is to bring students together for five days of anti-death penalty activism, education and fun. This is the place to be if you want to become a part of the next generation of human rights leaders. The 2010 event features six innocent death row exonerees: Shujaa Graham, Curtis McCarty, Ron Keine, Derrick Jamison, Perry Cobb and Juan Melendez. They are attending alternative spring break to speak with participants about how innocent people can end up on death row. Altogether, the six exonerees attending the alternative spring break spent a total of about 65 years on death row for crimes they did not commit.More information on the Dead Man Walking School Theater Project and the Death Penalty Alternative Spring Break may be found at http://dmwplay.org/ and http://www.springbreakalternative.org/deathpenalty/

CatholicTV broadcasts across the US on Sky Angel channel 142, and selected cable outlets in New England and in Chattanooga (TN) where CatholicTV is available on FiTV channel 153. To find out where to watch CatholicTV visit: http://www.CatholicTV.com/schedule/where-to-watch.aspx

CatholicTV is a nationally-broadcasted television network streaming a live feed 24 hours a day at CatholicTV.com. Heeding Pope Benedict XVI's call to greater utilize the power of television and new media, the CatholicTV Network features its cable TV station, Catholic web site, mobile apps and widget. Celebrate Mass online; pray The Rosary; enjoy programs on prayer, the saints, the Scriptures and the Catholic Church on America's Catholic Television Network.

“This is the Day” can also be seen on demand at www.CatholicTV.com or downloaded via iTunes.com.and SQPN.com The hosts, Father Robert Reed, and Jay Fadden discuss various topics of the week and respond to viewer mail (you may email the show at thisistheday@CatholicTV.com)

In response to a plea by the Innocence Project, Chromosomal Laboratories in Phoenix, Arizona has offered its accredited DNA testing services to help pursue justice. The offer was made to the Honorable Rick Perry, Governor of Texas for testing DNA evidence that could prove the innocence or guilt of Hank Skinner. Mr. Skinner is set to be executed on March 24th for the murder of his girlfriend and her two adult sons, which he was convicted of in 1995. The Innocence Project has asked that concerned individuals to urge Governor Perry to order a stay of execution until the testing can be completed.

DNA evidence in this case was never tested and the Texas’ highest criminal court has refused to intervene in the case. Mr. Skinner’s attorney claim that they have uncovered evidence that substantiates his claim that another suspect is involved and places doubt on his guilt of this crime. Mr. Skinner has always maintained his innocence and requested that DNA testing be done on potentially inculpatory evidence, in particular a windbreaker, knifes and hairs recovered from one of the victim’s hands.

While the Innocence Project does not maintain the innocence or guilt of Mr. Skinner, as they do not represent him, they point out that everything possible should be done before Mr. Skinner pays the ultimate price in what may be a colossal miscarriage of justice. When simple DNA testing may help prevent such a miscarriage, it seems implausible that the Governor and State of Texas would allow the execution to proceed. In order to help prevent this, Chromosomal Laboratories has decided to offer its services without any fees. We hope that the great State of Texas will accept this offer in the manner in which it is intended, to help promote justice.

About Chromosomal Laboratories, Inc.Chromosomal Laboratories, Inc. is a full service DNA laboratory that specializes in providing advanced DNA testing for forensics, paternity, immigration and other relationships that can be resolved through DNA identification. Chromosomal Laboratories also provides research and development and DNA consulting services. The company is based in Phoenix, Arizona.

Wednesday, 17 March 2010

"Today, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals refused to intervene in Mr. Skinner’s case (see attached Order). As a result, because state officials continue to refuse to conduct readily available DNA testing on evidence from the crime scene that could clear him, there remains a serious risk that Texas, one week from today, will execute an innocent man.

"We remain hopeful that the U.S. Supreme Court, which has often found it necessary to correct egregious injustices in Texas capital cases, will intervene to protect Mr. Skinner’s right to pursue that DNA testing in federal court. We also trust that Governor Perry, having heard the voices of Texans insisting that the death penalty not be carried out while there are unresolved doubts about a defendant’s guilt, will do the right thing and postpone Mr. Skinner's execution until all the facts are in.

"Time is growing short, and ultimately someone must have the courage and the common sense to step forward and ensure the reliability of this verdict through the best available scientific technology."

HOUSTON — The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has refused to halt the scheduled execution next week of a man convicted of a triple slaying in Pampa in the Texas Panhandle more than 16 years ago.

The state's highest criminal court Wednesday denied a request from 47-year-old Hank Skinner to stop his lethal injection, set for March 24 in Huntsville.

Skinner contends he's innocent of fatally bludgeoning 40-year-old Twila Busby and fatally stabbing her two adult sons, 22-year-old Elwin Caler and 20-year-old Randy Busby. They were killed at their home on New Year's Eve in 1993.

Skinner and his attorneys want additional time to test evidence for DNA they say could prove he's not the killer.

Skinner says he couldn't have committed the murders because when they occurred, he was passed out on a couch, sick from alcohol and codeine use.

Monday, 15 March 2010

When Gov. Rick Perrypardoned Timothy Cole earlier this month, it ended the Cole family’s long fight to clear his name. It is a heartbreaking case — and a stark reminder that we need to do more to ensure that our criminal justice system relies on solid evidence.

Cole was wrongfully convictedof rape two decades ago and died in prison in 1999. Last year, DNA testing proved his innocence and showed that another man committed the crime.

Cole’s conviction was based primarily on the victim’s identification of him and testimony from a forensic scientist linking him to the crime. The case is not an isolated mistake. Eyewitness misidentification contributed to more than 75 percent of the wrongful convictions overturned by DNA testing nationwide, and invalidated or improper forensic science played a role in approximately half the cases.

In Tim Cole’s case, solid science came too late. Perry was right to pardon him, but he would do well to learn from this case and make sure it doesn’t happen to anyone else.

One such person might be Hank Skinner, who is set to be executed March 24. Skinner has requested DNA testing for 10 years, and there is no good reason for state officials to continue blocking these efforts.

We don’t know whether Hank Skinner is guilty or innocent. But we know the governor has the power to step in and delay the execution so DNA testing can be done to resolve this case once and for all — before Skinner is executed.

Cole’s pardon and Skinner’s execution date come as questions continue to grow about the case of Cameron Todd Willingham, who was executed in 2004 for allegedly setting a fire that killed his children. At Willingham’s trial, forensic experts testified that evidence showed the fire was intentionally set. Several independent reviews — including one that was sent to Perry just hours before he failed to stop Willingham’s execution — have shown that the forensic science used in the case was invalid and that the analysts should have known that at the time.

Nearly four years ago, the Innocence Projectasked the TexasForensic Science Commission to review the cases of Willingham and another man, who was exonerated and pardoned by Perry because of faulty arson evidence. The Forensic Science Commission was asked whether the arson analysis in these cases was flawed, if other cases across the state might have been based on the same kind of faulty forensic analysis, and what improvements could prevent this from happening in other cases.

We believe it’s likely that there are other people in Texas prisons for arson convictions based on faulty forensic analysis. Unfortunately, politics interfered with the commission’s independent scientific work several months ago, when Perry replaced several commissioners. Days before the commission was to review the Willingham case, the new chairman canceled the meeting and has spent the past six months working on procedural issues.

Science proved Timothy Cole’s innocence 10 years too late. It threw Cameron Todd Willingham’s case into doubt several years too late. And it will soon be too late for science to definitively resolve Hank Skinner’s case before he is executed.

These cases remind us that much work remains to be done to ensure the integrity of Texas’ criminal justice system. Law enforcement agencies should establish written eyewitness identification procedures based on best practices, and we should ensure that forensic evidence is reliable and accurate, and defendants have access to that evidence.

The Forensic Science Commission needs to be protected from politicians so that Texans can trust that the commission’s decisions — and the evidence used in our courtrooms — are based on modern science instead of politics.

Attorneys representing Hank Skinner have formally asked Governor Rick Perry to issue a 30-day reprieve of Skinner's March 24 execution date and to order DNA testing in the case. You can view the letter and the appendices, which contain supporting documentation.

By this letter, we respectfully request that you exercise your authority to grant a 30-dayreprieve of execution to our client Henry W. Skinner, and order the DNA testing that Mr.Skinner has unsuccessfully pursued for more than a decade, and which could resolvelongstanding and troubling questions about his possible innocence.

As set forth more fully below, since his arrest in the early morning hours of January 1,1994, Mr. Skinner has always and consistently maintained that he did not commit thecrimes for which he was convicted. Physical evidence from the crime scene, witnessaccounts, and expert testimony all demonstrate that Mr. Skinner was so severely impaired at the time of the murders as a result of his extreme intoxication from drugs and alcohol that he would have lacked the physical and mental coordination even to perform simple tasks, let alone these three murders. Forensic DNA testing has a very strong likelihood of either confirming or disproving his claim of innocence. Indeed, even the evidence presented at Mr. Skinner's trial raised disturbing doubts about whether he could have murdered the victims, and since that time substantial new evidence has been uncovered that supports Mr. Skinner's claim of innocence.

And:

Mr. Skinner’s case has understandably attracted a great deal of public attention in recent weeks. While Texans undoubtedly support capital punishment, they insist that it be reserved for those who are clearly guilty. Their view is reflected in comments like those of former Bexar County District Attorney Sam Millsap:

Last week, Gov. Rick Perry granted the state's first posthumous pardon to a man who was innocent of a crime for which he had spent 13 years inprison. DNA testing cleared Tim Cole of a rape he did not commit, butunfortunately it came too late — nine years after he had died in prison.The state must do everything it can to prevent this kind of tragedy fromhappening again.

On March 24, Texas plans to execute Henry Watkins Skinner even thoughuntested DNA evidence could show we've got the wrong man. DNAtesting could resolve doubts about Skinner's guilt in the 1993 Pampaslayings of his girlfriend and her two sons, but the state inexplicably hasblocked that testing for more than a decade.

I'm not an advocate for Hank Skinner. I'm an advocate for the truth. IfDNA tests could remove the uncertainty about Skinner's guilt — one wayor the other — there's not a good reason in the world not to do it.

Rob Owen, Co-Director of the Capital Punishment Center at the University of Texas School of Law, is one of Skinner's lawyers and signed the letter to Governor Perry. The Medill Innocence Project at Northwestern University is also active in Skinner's case. Professor David Protess, the Director of the Medill Innocence Project, and eight of his journalism students conducted an extensive investigation of Mr. Skinner’s case in 2000. Their findings and additional background on the case can be found here.

The Texas governor's clemency authority is limited to issuing a single 30-day reprieve. Additional reprieves or longer reprieves can only be granted upon a positive recommendation by the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles. In Texas, governors do not sign a death warrant setting an execution date, and the governor has no legal authority over the execution date. The state district court in which the capital murder trial was held retains control of the case; the judge of that court orders the execution date.

Sunday, 14 March 2010

Henry "Hank" Skinner is scheduled to be executed on March 24 for the murder of his girlfriend Twila Busby and her two teenage sons. The crime itself was horrible, so horrible that it is easy to see why most Texans continue to support the death penalty in appropriate cases.

The facts are so horrible that decent people cringe whenever they are discussed.

Hank Skinner and his supporters argue that he is innocent of the murders. They admit that he was present at the house that horrible night, but they claim that he was too intoxicated - on vodka and codeine - to have the strength or presence of mind necessary to commit the heinous acts. They say someone else - possibly, Twila's uncle, who has since died - actually committed the horrible acts.

More to the point, Hank Skinner and his supporters claim that the Gray County District Attorney's Office has possession of a rape kit, skin from the victim's fingernails, a windbreaker, and two weapons from the crime scene that were never tested for DNA. They claim that testing on those items would prove, once and for all, who committed the murders.

At the time of his original trial, Hank Skinner's controversial attorney decided not to test those items. (Skinner's trial attorney had previously prosecuted his client twice. Then he was removed from his office because of a scandal).

In 2000, the state agreed to test some of the evidence, expecting it to disprove Skinner's claims. But that didn't happen; a hair found clutched in the victim's hand came, not from Skinner, but from one of the victim's relatives. So far, the courts have ruled against Skinner's request to have the rest of the evidence tested. At the risk of oversimplification, the courts say they won't second-guess the questionable attorney's decision. The case has garnered a lot of attention recently because of the impending execution date, but Skinner and his supporters have been fighting to have those tests for more than a decade.

I have to assume that the district attorney, like everyone who wants the execution to happen, believes without any doubt that Hank Skinner committed these murders. So why should she order this evidence to be tested, especially since that might result in a slight delay in the execution date? I can think of three reasons:

First, the attention directed at Skinner's case, and at Gray County, will not go away if the state carries out the execution on March 24.

Cameron Todd Willingham was executed more than six years ago, and the controversy over that decision in the legislature and the media continues to this day. All that negative attention, litigation, and political maneuvering could be avoided in this case if the state agrees to release the DNA results before the execution. If Skinner committed the murders, then the evidence will confirm that fact. All those who have opposed this execution will be silenced.

Second, if the testing is never conducted, then the horrible accusations directed against the Twila's uncle will continue to attract the attention of the press and the public, and the shadow cast over his memory will persist. If Skinner committed the murders, then this vicious criticism is completely undeserved. If Skinner committed the murders, then DNA tests will eliminate the uncle as a suspect and he will be the one exonerated.

Third, ordering the tests even without a court order shows the kind of courage and confidence Texans expect from our elected officials. One negative aspect of the coverage of this case is its focus on people's doubts about Skinner's guilt, which suggests that ordering the tests would be a tacit admission of weaknesses in the State's case. On the contrary, only the guilty and the mistaken have reason to fear the results.

That's why I encourage all responsible state officials to "take the high road" and order the DNA tests, then publish the results. That would show confidence in the outcome of the original trial. Those who believe Skinner is guilty don't believe they have anything to lose from the results, but they have much to gain.

I am troubled by the recurring suggestion that Texans are bloodthirsty and care nothing about innocence. Most people who support the death penalty believe it is the appropriate and moral punishment for someone who commits a heinous murder. No one believes that efficiency, finality, deterrence, or closure is so important that we should risk executing an innocent person.

If Skinner is executed before the evidence is tested, then generations of people will argue that Texas executed an innocent man. If Skinner is executed after the state publishes DNA results that stomp out those lingering doubts, then none of us will ever hear that accusation again.

Saturday, 13 March 2010

The speaker of the New York City Council and the head of the Council’s Public Safety Committee are calling on Police Commissioner Ray Kelly to get rid of his huge, noxious database of completely innocent New Yorkers who are stopped, questioned and often frisked by the police.

The stops themselves are an outrage and a continuing affront to black and Hispanic New Yorkers, who are the ones most frequently singled-out by the police for this public humiliation. But Speaker Christine Quinn and Council Member Peter Vallone Jr., the committee’s chairman, are focusing on the computerized files that the Police Department is keeping on people who are stopped but found to have done nothing at all wrong.

This is not a small problem. The cops are making more than a half-million of these stops every year. A vast majority of the people targeted — close to 90 percent — are completely innocent. They are not arrested. They are not given a summons. After enduring a mortifying public encounter with the police — which frequently requires the targets to sprawl face down on the sidewalk or spread themselves against a wall or over the hood of a car to be searched — they are sent on their way.

What they’ve left behind, however, if they’ve shown their identification to the cops or answered any questions, is a permanent record of the encounter, which is promptly entered into the department’s staggeringly huge computerized files. Why the Police Department should be keeping files on innocent people is a question with no legitimate answer. This is Big Brother in Blue, with Commissioner Kelly collecting more information than J. Edgar Hoover could ever have imagined compiling.

Ms. Quinn and Mr. Vallone believe it should stop. In a letter this week to Commissioner Kelly, they said that his intent to keep a permanent record of all the information gathered during the stops “raises significant privacy right concerns and suggests that these innocent people are more likely to be targeted in future criminal investigations.”

They bluntly urged the commissioner “to end this policy.”

In an interview on Friday, Ms. Quinn told me: “They should stop keeping the database on people who are not charged, who are not summonsed, and people who may be charged and then go through the judicial system and are found not guilty.”

She said the idea that a permanent database would be kept on people who “basically just got asked some questions” by the police is “extraordinary.”

Ms. Quinn does not oppose the tactic of stopping and frisking people, but said, “I have concerns that we have become overly aggressive in our use of it.” She said additional guidelines or regulations are needed. “I wouldn’t eliminate it from the Police Department toolbox,” she said, “but I would like to find a way to better monitor it and limit its use.”

It should be drastically limited. More than 575,000 stops were made last year, a record. But in 504,594 of those stops, the individuals had done absolutely nothing wrong. They had not violated any law but nevertheless were put through the anxiety and humiliation of a public encounter with the police.

From 2004 through 2009, according to Police Department statistics, an astounding 2,798,461 stops were made. In 2,467,150 of those encounters — 88.2 percent — the people were completely innocent of any wrongdoing.

Groups like the Center for Constitutional Rights and the New York Civil Liberties Union are fighting this wholesale mistreatment of innocent New Yorkers by the police. Blacks and Hispanics, and especially those who are young and those who are poor, are disproportionately singled-out for this peculiar form of police harassment. Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Commissioner Kelly and other top leaders in this town would never tolerate this kind of systematic abuse of middle-class or wealthy, white New Yorkers.

The overwhelming majority of the stops yield no law-enforcement benefit whatsoever. An analysis of the stops in the first three quarters of 2009 showed that contraband, which usually means drugs, was found on just 1.6 percent of the blacks who were stopped, 1.5 percent of the Hispanics, and 2.2 percent of the whites (who are stopped far less often than the other groups).

The weapons yield was even lower. Weapons were found on just 1.1 percent of the blacks stopped, 1.4 percent of the Hispanics, and 1.7 percent of the whites.

The reasons given by the cops for deciding which unfortunate New Yorkers will be stopped are beyond bogus. A “furtive movement” is the most popular. Walking down the street in broad daylight qualifies. And then there is always the bulge in the pocket. A cellphone, maybe. Or an iPod.

The truth — and many police officers will tell you this privately — is that the stops are often made first and the justification is dreamed up later.

Friday, 12 March 2010

Harris County Texas is the death penalty capital of the democratic world. It accounts for about 1 percent of the U.S. population but has carried out nearly 10 percent of the country's executions since 1976. So when a state district judge in Houston, Kevin Fine, unexpectedly ruled Texas's capital punishment procedures unconstitutional last week, it was a shot heard 'round the world.

Attorneys for the defendant in the case, John Edward Green Jr., who is charged with killing a woman in a robbery and shooting her sister, praised the decision as "the beginning of the end of the death penalty in Texas." But proponents of the death penalty, who carry larger bullhorns, were indignant. Greg Abbott, the state's attorney general, called the ruling "legally baseless," while Governor Rick Perry, who has presided over 211 executions during his long tenure, denounced the "activist judge [for] legislating from the bench."

Under fire from politicians and the media, which highlighted the magistrate's unusual background--his history of drug use, his liberalism, his tattoos--Judge Fine backed off on Tuesday, rescinding his decision and scheduling a hearing. But the legal and ethical issues are hardly settled. Acting on a pre-trial defense motion, Judge Fine asserted that Texas's death penalty is unconstitutional not because it's cruel and unusual, the province of the Eighth Amendment, but because the state's judicial institutions fail to guarantee criminal defendants due process under law, as required by the Fourteenth Amendment.

A growing body of evidence suggests that Judge Fine is correct, that Texas's practices in death penalty cases are more arbitrary than fair--and that innocents sometimes get the needle. The state's legal procedures tilt toward death from the moment a capital defendant reaches the courthouse door, especially in Harris County. There is no public defender system (though a fledgling office is under development), so low-income defendants get an attorney appointed by the trial judge. Unlike full-time prosecutors, defense lawyers are paid a flat fee, which rewards indolence since strenuous advocacy depresses the hourly wage. There is no set budget for independent experts, so most forensic evidence is vetted only by the county's infamously sloppy crime lab, which, according to a wide-ranging investigation launched in 2002, has botched hundreds of cases, almost always in favor of law enforcement. According to studies conducted by sociologist Scott Phillips, the outcomes of Harris County's capital prosecutions have been significantly influenced by a defendant's race, educational attainment, and ability to hire a private attorney.

Prompted by a string of scandals involving judicially appointed roustabouts who slept through their clients' trials or showed up to court drunk, Texas passed the Fair Defense Act in 2001, increasing state funding for indigent defense. Yet in Harris County prosecutors still outspend defense attorneys more than two to one. While the DA's office has a staff of 30 investigators, publically retained defense counselors have none.

Judicial review is supposed to guard against miscarriages of justice at trial, but Texas's elected appellate judges often wield their gavels as rubber stamps. In recent years, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the state's highest criminal court, has refused to release inmates despite DNA evidence proving their innocence, declined to overturn a guilty verdict despite revelations that the judge and prosecutor were sleeping together during the trial, dismissed police and prosecutorial misconduct as irrelevant, and refused to consider a life-or-death stay request when it arrived after business hours, resulting in a hasty execution. After embarrassing rebukes by the U.S. Supreme Court--a body dominated by law-and-order conservatives--the Texas Monthly labeled the Court of Criminal Appeals "the most notorious state high court in the country."

Texas's prosecutorial judiciary, more than the state's elevated crime rates or the harshness of its juries, keeps the 6:00 pm shift at The Walls in Huntsville unusually busy. Although others states have larger death rows, Texas has carried out almost 40 percent of the nation's executions since 1976--450 in all.2 Harris County alone is responsible for 112 executions, more than the entire Commonwealth of Virginia, the country's second most active death penalty state.

The numbers make Texas's capital justice system the most effectively lethal in the United States. But the flip side of efficiency is error, and Texas also leads the nation in the discovery of wrongful convictions, including 40 by DNA evidence and 11 exonerations from death row.

Worse, Judge Fine contends that the state is failing to exonerate and is thus "executing innocent persons"--a fear borne out by extensive posthumous reviews of at least five capital cases. Most famously, in 2004 Governor Perry approved the execution of Cameron Todd Willingham (one of my research subjects), despite overwhelming evidence that his conviction for homicide by arson was based on discredited fire science. Last fall, the State Forensic Science Commission was moving toward clearing Willingham, albeit after his death, but before hearings could be held, Perry replaced the commissioners, thereby quashing the inquiry.

Advocates of judicial restraint argue that Texas should improve its capital punishment system legislatively, but in my research on the history of crime and punishment in the South, I found that meaningful change has almost always come from the outside, from the abolition of slavery forward. On a range of issues from racial bias in jury selection to capital verdicts in juvenile cases, Texas has stepped back from severity not after having second thoughts but in compliance with federal court orders. This could flip as the state's rapidly changing demographics alter its electoral and law enforcement culture, but until Texas's standards of decency evolve, maverick judges like Kevin Fine should be applauded for speaking uncomfortable truths. What Texas needs more of is precisely what its attorney general fears: "unabashed judicial activism" in the interest of equal justice.

Greg Taylor, finally free almost 17 years after being wrongfully convicted for murder, told the New York Times, “This morning, I was laying in a jail cell with a crazy person banging on the wall next to me. Now I’m sitting at a fancy Italian restaurant talking on a cellphone.”

Taylor is the first to be freed on the recommendation of North Carolina’s Innocence Inquiry Commission. He had served 6,149 days for a murder that a three-judge panel now says he didn’t commit. His conviction and eventual exoneration reveal much about shortcomings in America’s criminal justice system.

The Associated Press reported District Attorney, C. Colon Willoughby’s post-exoneration apology to Taylor. Willoughby, the DA for Wake County, North Carolina, serves the city of Raleigh, where Taylor had been convicted of the 1991 slaying of Jaquetta Thomas. Willoughby described his apology saying, “I told him I’m very sorry he was convicted. I wish we had had all of this evidence in 1991.”

Willoughby’s comments sound gracious, but how sincere are they?

The News & Observer, based in Raleigh, North Carolina, quotes former FBI agent Gregg McCrary, who said of the now vacated conviction, “There’s tunnel vision and a rush to judgment in this case.”

But there was no rush to reconsider his case, despite the shaky evidence that convicted him. The case built against Taylor relied on jailhouse snitches who received reduced sentences for providing prosecutors with testimony implicating him. There was also questionable physical evidence—stains in Taylor’s truck that investigators initially took for blood. But prosecutors, working under Colon Willoughby, have maintained that they were ignorant of further testing that showed the stains not to be blood. As late as 2003 the Wake County District Attorney’s Office—headed by the now-gracious Willoughby—opposed DNA testing that might have strengthened Taylor’s post-conviction claims of innocence. In 1996 Craig Taylor (no relation to the exonerated Greg Taylor) began trying to confess to the murder of Jaquetta Thomas. The News & Observer reports that prison medical records indicate that he’d told a prison therapist that he’d committed two murders. But no one talked to him further at that time.

So it was not until this month that Greg Taylor’s conviction was reversed. The New York Times explained that the panel charged with deciding on the recommendation of the North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission determined that the evidence of Taylor’s innocence was “clear and convincing.” Greg Taylor “had been convicted based on flawed evidence and unreliable testimony.”

Although DNA didn’t play a role in Taylor’s exoneration, his case nevertheless reveals a pattern made clear by over 250 DNA exonerations documented by the Innocence Project at the Cardozo School of Law. Taylor’s conviction resulted from improper application of forensic science, and the use of snitch testimony, two causal factors that have long been identified with wrongful convictions.

Other causes for wrongful convictions include eyewitness misidentification, government misconduct, false confessions, and bad lawyering. Because all of these factors are widespread, researchers think that wrongful convictions are far more common than once believed. Although recent emphasis has been on DNA exonerations, Taylor’s case shows that innocence claims without DNA support also merit a fuller consideration than our traditional appellate avenues have provided.

His case also exposes the inertia and arrogance of a criminal justice system that provides few routes for those who have valid claims of innocence. The process that led to Taylor’s release is unique to North Carolina. No other state has anything like its Innocence Inquiry Commission. The commission is made of eight members, a superior court judge, a prosecuting attorney, a criminal defense attorney, a sheriff, a victims’ rights advocate, a member of the public and two additional discretionary appointments, who review claims of innocence that involve new evidence. If, upon review of a case, the commission votes that there is sufficient evidence of factual innocence, the commission will ask a three-judge panel to hear the relevant evidence and rule on the case. The commission, established in 2006 is highly selective in choosing cases for review. Its formation in 2006 was spurred by exonerations that had been delayed, lengthy, costly, and damaging to public confidence.

It also remains to be seen if District Attorney Colon Willoughby’s newly found contrition will motivate him to reform the flawed practices that led to Greg Taylor’s wrongful conviction.

Sunday, 7 March 2010

On March 4th, the CCA affirmed the March 24th date for Hank'sexecution, or more exactly it states it doesn't have jurisdiction tooverrule the Judge's order. The order has been posted in the legaldocuments section on the website.

Please help Hank get the DNA testing. I have added a list ofnewspapers and journalists to whom you can copy your letter to theDA, below:

Hank sent a 5-page letter to the Gray County D.A. Lynn Switzer with anumber of exhibits, which was received by her office on January 27th2010.

These documents can be downloaded in the "legal documents" section -"DNA Issue" paragraph on the website.

Please take the time to read the letter, the exhibits document allthe points and statements made by Hank in his letter.

As you will understand from his letter, Hank is asking the D.A. toput the execution warrant on hold, to grant him a 120-day reprieveand order the DNA testing. It is important to support him in thisvital attempt. Of course the purpose is NOT to write to the D.A. andattack her for what she hasn't done or should have done. What needsto be emphasized is that justice calls for the truth and the untestedevidence is crucial to prove his innocence. Her position as D.A. isto ensure that justice is served and not to allow the execution of aninnocent man when so many issues remain unresolved just a few weeksfrom his execution date.

For more impact, you may consider copying your letter to a localmedia of your choice and also to enclose a copy of Hank's letter aswell. If you do so, make sure you include the information after yoursignature; ie: cc. Houston Chronicle (whathever newpaper you chooseor the journalist's name). Here is a non-exhaustive short list ofnewspapers and/or journalists you can cc your letter to:

- All of the state's chief investigators and medical examiner on thecase testified in pre-trial and trial that they personally collectedthe evidence in question that we are seeking to test, that theybelieve evidence would conclusively show who killed Twila, Scooterand Randy. So why won't they allow it to be tested?

- Both the State's star witnesses (Andrea Reed & Howard Mitchell)have testified that they believe Hank to be innocent.

- All three of the previous D.A.s have publicly stated that theybelieve the evidence needs to be tested.

- Article 2.01 of the TX code of criminal procedure compels the D.A.to test the evidence or, allow the deffense to test it.

- The D.A. has admitted in Ch 64 DNA pleadings that the evidence isin a condition making testing possible, that the chain of custody hasbeen maintained, that the evidence is capable of providing aprobative result and idendity is an issue in Hank's case.

- Texas should not execute a man it does not know for a fact to beguilty. After Andrea Reed's recantation, according to the state own'sexperts, the remaining evidence does nothing to prove guilt at all.The A.G has stated through his spokesman that it would violate theconstitution to murder someone who is innocent - that has got toapply equally to someone they do not know for a fact to be guilty.

Wednesday, 3 March 2010

Join us March 15-19, 2010 in Austin, Texas for the award-winning Anti-Death Penalty Alternative Spring Break.

Special guests will be six innocent death row exoneress: Shujaa Graham, Curtis McCarty, Ron Keine, Derrick Jamison, Perry Cobb and Juan Melendez. They are attending alternative spring break to speak with participants about how innocent people can end up on death row. Altogether, the six exonerees attending the alternative spring break spent a total of about 65 years on death row for crimes they did not commit.

It's free, except for a $25 housing fee for those who need us to arrange housing for you. We will house you in a shared room with other spring breakers in either a hotel or dorm. You are responsible for your travel, food and other expenses, but the program and most of the housing costs are on us. The $25 housing fee is all you pay.

Tuesday, 2 March 2010

The Cook County Board today agreed to pay $525,000 to a former Death Row inmate already given $5.5 million by the city to settle a wrongful conviction lawsuit.

The money due under the settlement approved by the board will be paid to Leroy Orange in five equal installments, the last of which is due in January 2014. He spent 19 years behind bars until former Gov. George Ryan pardoned him in 2003.

Like several other former murder defendants, Orange alleged that former Chicago Police Cmdr. Jon Burge used torture to force his murder confession. Neither the city nor the county admitted wrongdoing in settling the cases.

The city portion of the suit, settled two years ago, alleged wrongdoing by police officers. The county portion deal with alleged wrongdoing by a Dennis Dernbach, a onetime assistant state’s attorney who went on to become a judge before retiring.

“It’s really a good deal for everyone,” Commissioner Larry Suffredin, D-Evanston, said of the settlement. “It gets us out from under this, and it ends all litigation. There will be no appeal. This settles everything.”